Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

cbc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 839 posts

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#301

Post by AnHonestComment »

triceratops wrote: post #291
tunesmith wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is it - not the lawsuit itself, but the public perception of it - could come back to bite the other side. There have been plenty of good reasons to suspect electronic voting in the past, at least in the absence of verifiable paper backups and regular random sampling recounts of those paper ballots. Which is still a pretty rare practice, isn't it? In the absence of those standards, it's still reasonable to…

> The problem is it - not the lawsuit itself, but the public perception of it - could come back to bite the other side. That's a valid concern when you're dealing with a good-faith actor. But if voting machines are open-source (which I heartily support), they'll move on to baselessly discrediting something else to shape public perception. The problem isn't the technology per se. The problem is we're not dealing with…

No, the problem is the technology as such:

Voting is a system that needs to be simple, transparent, and auditable. The technical solutions are 0/3 and an example of “over engineering” leading to a poor quality solution.

Our current voting system is well below international standards — and it’s because of the technology.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#302

Post by mountainboy »

kingnothing wrote: post #230
covidthrow wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And how many people do you think review that paper? Probably as many as review their grocery store receipts, I'd guess. Which is to say, practically none.

Probably everyone. I voted on a Dominion machine this year. It prints out a full size piece of paper on thick stock with big font saying who you're voting for. You then have to carry that piece of paper to the ballot counting machine and stand in line for a minute before it's your turn to put your vote in the counter. The piece of paper isn't a receipt, it's your actual ballot. In the case of the elections this year,…

Did you notice if the ballot had a QR code on it? Did you scan the QR code, decipher its data structure and verify it matches your voting intent?

Because according to what I saw presented in hearings, the reading machines actually read the QR code made by ballot-marking-device, not the human readable portion of the ballot.

If true, that seems an obvious design flaw (to be nice) right there.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#303

Post by yters »

yesdocs wrote: post #8

I hope whatever happens with these lawsuits it chills the baseless accusations of voter fraud used to undermine voter confidence in our democracy

Ironically, a previous version of this company known as Diebold was used in the 2004 election, and Democrats claimed the electronic voting machines were used to commit voter fraud. Apparently, one could open up the vote ledger in MS Access and modify the votes without any kind of audit trail or password. Hopefully after the multiple rebrandings Dominion has gotten its security under better control :D

See the leaked memos from Diebold here: https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~matth/lists/

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#304

Post by cma »

tunesmith wrote: post #228
yesdocs wrote: post #8

I hope whatever happens with these lawsuits it chills the baseless accusations of voter fraud used to undermine voter confidence in our democracy

The problem is it - not the lawsuit itself, but the public perception of it - could come back to bite the other side. There have been plenty of good reasons to suspect electronic voting in the past, at least in the absence of verifiable paper backups and regular random sampling recounts of those paper ballots. Which is still a pretty rare practice, isn't it? In the absence of those standards, it's still reasonable to…

Those things in the past helped push for paper receipts. In every contested state there were paper receipts this time. We should expand that to everywhere that uses electronic voting, but we don't have to lie about irregularities to do it.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#305

Post by wlesieutre »

unanswered wrote: post #284
dukeofdoom wrote: post #240

Rudy has a YouTube channel, you can hear him make his allegations and judge if it amounts to defamation. Most of them seem to be carefully phrased. https://www.youtube.com/c/RudyWGiuliani/videos Of all the claims that stuck out to me is the suitcase video, since it time corresponds with a one sided spike of votes.

I wish someone would honestly respond to the suitcase video, but I haven't seen any attempted defense of it yet. I would really prefer not to believe Giuliani, and yet that video is pretty damn hard to get around. None of it matters, of course, because realpolitik, and the biggest sin of the viking cosplayers was believing that any of this evidence matters.

>I haven't seen any attempted defense of it yet

Ok but did you look?

https://www.wsbtv.com/news/politics/georgia-election-officia...

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#306

Post by mountainboy »

wyldfire wrote: post #129
covidthrow wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And how many people do you think review that paper? Probably as many as review their grocery store receipts, I'd guess. Which is to say, practically none.

How would the machine predict which voters to deceive? I reviewed my printed ballot before submitting it. I'd guess it is probably more than "practically none". If 0.1% of voters did this, it would be 159633 ballots reviewed. If the tainted machines consistently changed these ballots to the same presidential candidate, ~80,000 voters would have had an opportunity to detect a dishonest voting machine. What ratio of vo…

Don't need to. The reading machines read a QR code generated by the ballot-marking-device. Or so I've seen experts testify.

The QR code could mis-match the printed ballot on say 5% of the ballots and nobody would notice a thing.

Need a recount? Ok, just run em through again, and they'll read the same (wrong) votes again, no problem.

Only a hand count of the paper ballots would catch the mis-match.

Did that actually happen? I don't know. But if the machines are truly reading a QR code, that seems a glaring flaw regardless.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#307

Post by athenot »

pdonis wrote: post #295
jonas21 wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that's the thing about Dominion -- their machines do generate a paper trail, and this paper trail was audited. One of the big pushes to secure this election compared to previous ones was to use as many voting machines with auditable paper trails as possible.

> their machines do generate a paper trail Not the same kind of paper trail that exists when a voter fills out a paper ballot. If I fill out a paper ballot, that ballot is independent evidence of the votes I intended to cast, because I filled it out directly, with no machine in the middle. So that paper ballot is a useful auditing mechanism for checking on machine-generated vote counts. If I electronically cast votes…

Since I voted in Georgia on these machines, the process is the following:

- get ID validated & ability to vote

- get an initialized smart card

- insert in polling machine, fill out stuff

- submit, get printout from printer

- scan printout into a machine

- return smart card

At the polling places I was at (we had a runoff), the staff + signage was emphasizing to check results on printout.

The printing and the scanning felt terribly wasteful but as it turned out, it became a precious way to audit. The bonus is that the printout is normalized, not some person's handwriting that could be subject to misinterpretation.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#308

Post by ChrisLomont »

pdonis wrote: post #295
jonas21 wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that's the thing about Dominion -- their machines do generate a paper trail, and this paper trail was audited. One of the big pushes to secure this election compared to previous ones was to use as many voting machines with auditable paper trails as possible.

> their machines do generate a paper trail Not the same kind of paper trail that exists when a voter fills out a paper ballot. If I fill out a paper ballot, that ballot is independent evidence of the votes I intended to cast, because I filled it out directly, with no machine in the middle. So that paper ballot is a useful auditing mechanism for checking on machine-generated vote counts. If I electronically cast votes…

Conversely, hand filled out ballots are a mess, often illegible, the hanging chad fiasco, etc. With electronic voting, the voter can (should?) see on a screen exactly what they did, and the machine can make multiple exact copies in electronic and paper formats of that exact result. There is far less ambiguity in the physical record once this has been done.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#309

Post by birdman3131 »

pdonis wrote: post #295
jonas21 wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that's the thing about Dominion -- their machines do generate a paper trail, and this paper trail was audited. One of the big pushes to secure this election compared to previous ones was to use as many voting machines with auditable paper trails as possible.

> their machines do generate a paper trail Not the same kind of paper trail that exists when a voter fills out a paper ballot. If I fill out a paper ballot, that ballot is independent evidence of the votes I intended to cast, because I filled it out directly, with no machine in the middle. So that paper ballot is a useful auditing mechanism for checking on machine-generated vote counts. If I electronically cast votes…

Its kinda hard not to see how you voted at least around here. It is printed off in fairly large print on the paper ballot which is then taken to a separate machine to actually tally the votes. (No clue as to the brand used though. At a ~65% trump vote my vote was worthless anyways though so why pay attention to the machines.)

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#310

Post by yters »

seanalltogether wrote: post #43

I remember a lot of accusation about Diebold voting back in the 2000s, and concerns about lack of auditability. My understanding is that newer systems now let you vote at a machine, but it spits out a receipt that the voter can verify and the county can hold on to for the sake of audits and recounts. Is this standard now, or on a state by state basis?

Dominion purchases Diebold in 2010.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominion_Voting_Systems

Hopefully they improved the security since then...

https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~matth/lists/

Post reply on HN